You will find that if you continuously place bets based on the belief of periodic 5% corrections, you will find the timing to be that when they occur, you would have lost out on probably a bit more than 5% growth in the meanwhile.By all means look at the attached chart of the S&P 500 since the bottom of 2009. I count more than 15 5%+ corrections over that 10 year period. So yeah, they are lot more common. Don't need a quantitative edge or special knowledge to know that nothing goes up in straight line and assets are in a continuous cycle of going from overvalued to undervalued. The market is efficient? I don't think so. Not a popular opinion to have but I just don't buy into it. If the market was efficient, things like Steinhoff and Enron would never have happened.
If you know that assets are in a continuous cycle of being undervalued vs overvalued, then simply buy low, sell high and make a fortune. The reason you can’t do this, is precisely because of efficiency.
There’s nothing about the Steinhoff or Enron situation (that I know of) that contradicts the efficient market theory - what specifically are you referring to?